Magazines

[wodin (OP)]

Just checking I'm doing this right...do you need a magazine for each missile launcher? I.e if I have 20 launchers i then need twenty magazines...

[Shadow]

No, you don't. Magazines add to the ship's central missile storage, from which any launcher can draw.

There's something I've been wondering, however...

What's the difference, for example, between having a single 120-capacity magazine and having ten 12-capacity ones? Is the latter more expensive and/or space-consuming? The upside would be compartmentalizing your ordnance storage, meaning individual magazines could take damage separately without causing the ejection/destruction of a substantial part of your missile supply on a catastrophic hit.

[Andrew]

It depends how you build them largerer magazines can be more efficient in space so a 20 HS magazine can have 1 HTK in which case it will hold more missiles than 20 size 1 1 htk magazines of the same tech.
I usually design an magazine of 2 or 3 HS with 1 htk and use multiples of them so I dont have lots og magazine designs to worry about

[Brian Neumann]

The main difference between 1 big magazine and several smaller ones is the compartmentalization.  The more hits to kill you are working with the less missiles you will have on board for the same hull space.  My personal favorite is a 5hs magazine with a htk of 2.  This helps against smaller hits that just barely penetrate armour from having a garanteed destruction (1 point vs 2 htk = 50% kill rate).  It also helps against mesons the same way.  In comparison a 20hs 1 htk could probably squeeze in an extra 3-4 missiles, but is it worth it given that 1 hit will take out a huge chunk of your ammo, and if you do not eject it will probably destroy your ship completely.  It is definitly a style choice more than anything else.

Brian

[sloanjh]

It depends how you build them largerer magazines can be more efficient in space so a 20 HS magazine can have 1 HTK in which case it will hold more missiles than 20 size 1 1 htk magazines of the same tech.

Ummm I just checked this in the game, and it does not seem to be the case.

I'm at feed efficiency of 90%, so a size-1, 1HTK magazine has a capacity of 18 (20*90%).  A size-20, 1HTK magazine has a capacity of 360, which is 20x the size-1 capacity.  (It also has a research cost of 1000, which is 20x the research cost of the size-1 magazine.)  The material cost is also 20x larger.   The reason that this scaling works is that 1HTK essentially means "unarmored".

This means that, with the current rules, size-1, 1HTK magazines are MUCH superior to larger 1HTK magazines - 20 size-1s have 20x the HTK of 1 size-20.  I think this is actually a bug which could be fixed in 2 ways:

1)  Make the choice be HTK/HS, so that a size-20, 1HTK/HS magazine had a HTK of 20.  This would make the size decision neutral.
2)  Subtract 1 from the HTK scaling.  What are currently 1HTK magazines would become 0HTK (like small fuel tanks, they're destroyed but don't absorb the hit).  This means that unarmored magazines would all have 0 HTK, and the scaling works again.

Note that once you put armor on the magazines (raise the HTK above 1), the economies of scale kick in - it's cheaper to armor a big magazine than a small one, due to the lower surface/volume ratio.

John

[wodin (OP)]

Oh damn....I've been giving a magazine for every launcher!!!!

[Peter Rhodan]

multiple smaller magazines really come into their own when you start taking hits - I had 2 ships - one was a rebuild of the other design - it had 2 smaller magazines because I could now get the same missiles in 2 rather than 1 bigger magazine on the ship due to engine tech freeing up space - both ships got hit by an 8 damage missile - ship one took 1 hit on its magazine - ship 2 took 1 hit on a magazine - ship 1 had 1 fire control and 3 launchers intact after damage but no missiles - ship 2 had 1 fire control and only 2 launchers left but 1 of the 2 magazines giving it 30 odd missile sit could fire with...

[Charlie Beeler]

As Brian said, compartmentalization.  It does increase your 'hits to kill', but the real benefit is reduced size explosions when they are hit.  The downside is increased cost per ship.

My design philosophy is to design a magazine that supports the salvo count I want a launcher to have.  When you add a launcher you add a magazine.  Counter Missile magazines usually have storage for 75 missiles at size 1, anti-ship missile magazines usually have space for 20-30 size 4-6 missiles. 

Magazines for colliers I do differently.  Those I make much larger since they are not intended to be in the direct fighting.

[sloanjh]

As Brian said, compartmentalization.  It does increase your 'hits to kill', but the real benefit is reduced size explosions when they are hit.  The downside is increased cost per ship.

My design philosophy is to design a magazine that supports the salvo count I want a launcher to have.  When you add a launcher you add a magazine.  Counter Missile magazines usually have storage for 75 missiles at size 1, anti-ship missile magazines usually have space for 20-30 size 4-6 missiles. 

Magazines for colliers I do differently.  Those I make much larger since they are not intended to be in the direct fighting.

Are you armoring your magazines?  Because if not, then the cost of 20 size-1 1HTK magazines appears to be identical to the cost of 1 size-20 1HTK magazine.  In other words there is no cost savings.  Again, if you're armoring up, the story's different.

[pause while playing with magazine design screen]

Ok, even with armor, it seems like size-1 is MUCH better to achieve the same HTK.  First, the selector only goes up to 10HTK.  So if you're at size 10 or more, it's impossible to get more total HTK than using an equivalent capacity of size-1.  Second, the capacity for the same total HTK is smaller for a big magazine (and hence the cost is larger).  I just compared 5 size-1 HTK2 (w/laminate composite armor, efficiency 90%) to 1 size-5 HTK10.  A single size-1 holds 17 points and costs 1.61, so 5 of them hold 85 points and cost 8.05.  The size 5 holds 70 points and costs 15.79.  The size-1 magazines are superior in all respects.

I've decided to log this as a bug....

John

[Rastaman]

But doesn't the ammo explode when the magazine is killed? Unarmored magazines are a secondary explosion waiting to happen.

[mavikfelna]

The higher the HTK of the magazine the less likely it is to be breached and so the less likely it is to suffer a secondary explosion. so 5 2HTK magazines does not equal 1 10HTK magazine. The 5 magazines are 5 times more likely to get hit in the first place and then any point of damage has a 50% chance of penetrating and damaging the missiles, causing a secondary explosion. With the 10HTK magazine, it only has 1 entry on the damage table so you're less likely to get hit and then when it does, there is only a 10% chance that that single point of damage is going to penetrate.

And if you take bigger hits, the higher HTK means they are less likely to automatically overcome the HTK, since a 2 point hit will go through the 2HTK magazine every time but only penetrate the 10HTK mag 20% of the time.

--Mav

[Charlie Beeler]

Are you armoring your magazines?  Because if not, then the cost of 20 size-1 1HTK magazines appears to be identical to the cost of 1 size-20 1HTK magazine.  In other words there is no cost savings.  Again, if you're armoring up, the story's different.

[pause while playing with magazine design screen]

Ok, even with armor, it seems like size-1 is MUCH better to achieve the same HTK.  First, the selector only goes up to 10HTK.  So if you're at size 10 or more, it's impossible to get more total HTK than using an equivalent capacity of size-1.  Second, the capacity for the same total HTK is smaller for a big magazine (and hence the cost is larger).  I just compared 5 size-1 HTK2 (w/laminate composite armor, efficiency 90%) to 1 size-5 HTK10.  A single size-1 holds 17 points and costs 1.61, so 5 of them hold 85 points and cost 8.05.  The size 5 holds 70 points and costs 15.79.  The size-1 magazines are superior in all respects.

I've decided to log this as a bug....

John

To be truthful I haven't compared the costs after the last changes to magazines.  Add to that I'm working from memory since I haven't had time to play since mid February (employed again yay!!)

But the part about reduced secondaries should still hold true.

[Brian Neumann]

. With the 10HTK magazine, it only has 1 entry on the damage table so you're less likely to get hit and then when it does, there is only a 10% chance that that single point of damage is going to penetrate.

And if you take bigger hits, the higher HTK means they are less likely to automatically overcome the HTK, since a 2 point hit will go through the 2HTK magazine every time but only penetrate the 10HTK mag 20% of the time.

--Mav

Actually the entry in the damage control table is based on the total size of the item.  So 10 1hs magazines are just as likely to recieve a hit as 1 10hs magazine is if everything else is the same on the ship.  The chance of damaging the magazine is obviously different depending on the htk and the weapon hitting it.  The damage that is done is whatever damage is left after penetrating armour and other internals already done.  Ie a 20 point warhead that had 15 points get through armour is going to auto destroy that 1 size 10magazine with a htk 10, and still have 5 more points of damage to apply to the next system.  In addition the big magazine, if it has a secondary explosion is going to do a lot more damage than any single 1 hs magazine would.

Brian

[Erzengel]

Note that while cost and hullspace scale linear, personnel needed does not - larger magazines need less personnel than smaller magazines for the same amount of magazine space.  More personnel means more hullspace needed for life support.

[sloanjh]

Note that while cost and hullspace scale linear, personnel needed does not - larger magazines need less personnel than smaller magazines for the same amount of magazine space.  More personnel means more hullspace needed for life support.

I just looked at the design window, and the personnel scaling actually is linear - it's just that it's 1.5 crew/HS, which rounds up to the next nearest integer.  So you're right, you'd pay 20 crew for 10 size-1 magazines, rather than 15 crew for 1 size-10, i.e. an extra 0.5 crew/HS.  Since 1 HS of crew quarters supports 250 crew, this translates into a tax of .002 HS per (size-1) magazine, i.e. a ~0.2% efficiency hit.  To put it a different way, you'd have to pay for an extra small crew quarters (50 crew, 0.2 HS) in for every 100 size-1 magazines.

So yes, this is a case where size-1 does worse, but the effect is negligible.  And the effect goes away completely if you use size-2 magazines (3 crew each).

John